Not worth the extra cost? Diluting the differentiation ability of highly rated products by altering the meaning of rating scale levels

Over the last decade, the use of rating scales has grown in popularity in various fields, including customer online reviews and energy labels. Rating scales convey important information on attributes of products or services that consumers evaluate in their purchase decisions. By applying multidimensional scaling, this paper reveals that the meaning of the levels of a rating scale can be altered by manipulating the labeling of the rating scale levels. The study reveals that consumers perceive product attributes as being more similar if the labels share similar or identical linguistic or visual characteristics. In addition, two choice-based conjoint studies examine whether the way consumers make their choices among products can be influenced by changing the labeling of rating scale levels. The results show that a manipulation of the meaning of rating scale levels diminishes both the importance of the rating scale information and consumers' willingness to pay a premium for a rating upgrade.

[1]  J. W. Hutchinson,et al.  Nearest neighbor analysis of psychological spaces. , 1986 .

[2]  Leslie F. Clark,et al.  RATING SCALES NUMERIC VALUES MAY CHANGE THE MEANING OF SCALE LABELS , 1991 .

[3]  M. Mazis,et al.  Determinants of scale response: Label versus position. , 1978 .

[4]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Modeling the effects of including/excluding attributes in choice experiments on systematic and random components , 2007 .

[5]  Subhash Sharma,et al.  The impact of the number of scale points, dispositional factors, and the status quo decision heuristic on scale reliability and response accuracy , 2005 .

[6]  K. Train,et al.  On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths , 2000 .

[7]  J. Louviere,et al.  A comparison of importance weights and willingness-to-pay measures derived from choice-based conjoint, constant sum scales and best-worst scaling , 2008 .

[8]  Michael C. Hout,et al.  Multidimensional Scaling , 2003, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology.

[9]  S. Satchell,et al.  Retirement Investor Risk Tolerance in Tranquil and Crisis Periods: Experimental Survey Evidence , 2010 .

[10]  C. Ringle,et al.  The Impact of Brand Extension Success Drivers on Brand Extension Price Premiums , 2010 .

[11]  B. Orme.  Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research , 2005 .

[12]  Jj Louviere,et al.  Confound it! That pesky little scale constant messes up our convenient assumptions , 2006 .

[13]  O. Reiser,et al.  Principles Of Gestalt Psychology , 1936 .

[14]  A. Tversky.  Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[15]  J. Kruskal.  Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis , 1964 .

[16]  Rolf Wüstenhagen,et al.  Dynamic Adjustment of Eco-labeling Schemes and Consumer Choice – the Revision of the EU Energy Label as a Missed Opportunity? , 2012 .

[17]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[18]  B. Weijters,et al.  The effect of rating scale format on response styles: the number of response categories and response catgory labels , 2010 .